Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Sex-Based Differences in Gastroduodenal Artery Morphometry.

Created on 23 Oct 2026

Authors

Morgan W Stewart, Jenna M Watts, Vincent J Schmidt, Simran Aulakh, Cameron T Smith, Forrest Dunivin, Julia Kirkland, Melissa Zolnierz

Published in

Cureus. Volume 18. Issue 9. Pages e116666. Epub Sep 21, 2026.

Abstract

The gastroduodenal artery (GDA) supplies the upper gastrointestinal tract, and variation in its geometry may influence endovascular access and hepatobiliary interventions. This study evaluated sex-based differences in the GDA branching angle and diameter using standardized morphometric analysis.
This retrospective cadaveric morphometric study included 28 formalin-embalmed donors (12 males and 16 females) examined between 2024 and 2025. Inclusion criteria required an intact GDA and common hepatic artery suitable for analysis. Following targeted vessel dissection, perpendicular images were obtained with in-plane calibration and analyzed using ImageJ (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA). Branching angle and mid-segment diameter were measured independently by two blinded observers. Sex-based differences were assessed using independent-samples t-tests, applying Welch's correction when the assumption of homogeneity of variance was violated.
Twenty-eight donors (mean age 77 ± 8 years; 12 males and 16 females) were evaluated. Male donors demonstrated significantly smaller GDA branching angles than female donors (95.83° ± 23.79° vs. 119.51° ± 17.75°; p = 0.006) and significantly larger diameters (5.67 ± 2.57 mm vs. 3.17 ± 0.70 mm; p = 0.007).
Sex-based differences were identified in GDA geometry, which may influence computed tomography (CT) angiography interpretation and interventional planning.

PMID:
42909318
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 23 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 4
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement